Topic 'CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20' in forum 'TekSavvy'

Topic 'CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20' in forum 'TekSavvy' - dslreports.com http://www.dslreports.com/forum/CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21453525 en Sat, 11 Feb 2012 16:25:39 EDT Sat, 11 Feb 2012 16:25:39 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21479020
»www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008···qna.html

Excerpt

"But by looking at the issues we also recognized that there are some more fundamental issues here because Bell and all the carriers own their networks and they claim they have the right to manage their traffic how they choose. We're saying, 'Is there something we should be looking at in regards to the extent to which their rights to manage their network ... infringe on other peoples' rights?' We're saying, 'Let's have a public notice and take a look at all the issues, not just one company, but all the companies, and not just one group of customers but all customers, and see if there really is a need for us to define guidelines or not in this case.'"

"The evidence before us, as filed and defended or criticized by the parties … it was a public, transparent process. All the information was provided. We took a look at the evidence and the submissions of the parties and made a finding with regard to the specific claim and allegation, but also recognized there are broader issues we do need to get involved in, and that's why we issued the public notice."

CBCNews.ca: The [Canadian Association of Internet Providers] and its members have complained that they weren't notified in October that the decision would be delayed, or that a ruling was coming on Thursday. Can you shed any light on why weren't they notified in advance of either event?

Katz: None at all. I don't know what the timelines are. Usually the commission makes a decision and it goes to the lawyers and writers to craft the decision. Then we're told when it goes out and we put together the appropriate machinery to get it out the door. I have no idea who was notified, when they were notified or who was given advance notice or not. I would think we treat everybody the same. No idea at all.

craft the decision ? .. wtf . anyone? definition of craft ? hah

what i got out of this from the CRTC was that " it could go one way .. or ther other.. and they obviouslyjust went with Bell on this one .. based purely on submissions.

NOW they want public input to formulate the next decision.

they only really looked at the piece of this and looked the wrong way .

Now they want publics voice... ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21479020 Mon, 24 Nov 2008 18:28:09 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21478889 said by mlerner:

The hardware would not be cheap.
»quozl.linux.org.au/openwrt/power···peed.txt

Sounds like you can get 24 mbitps using blowfish on a wrt54g, more than enough for ADSL. A Linksys with custom firmware turning it into a VPN/hardware encryption device. Bell can't DPI the traffic then, except traffic shape the 1 unknown VPN connection through packetloss which is a natural speed limiter. VPNs are unlikely to be subject to DPI because of corporate users complaining. Also one of the congestion arguments (a bunch of TCP connections from a p2p user will squeeze the 1 TCP connection by a HTTP user, since TCP tends to balance out each connection to an equal share of the media/pipe).]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21478889 Mon, 24 Nov 2008 18:06:21 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21478245 said by Tack:

said by fiestaware:

They will scan the thing and bin it, thinking "15-year-old".

Or more insidiously, they will skim it, and begin to make subconscious prejudgments that the anti-throttling, pro-net-neutrality camp must be total nutters, and will be less likely to give our genuine arguments objective consideration in the future.
^ What I'm getting at, yeah. If not "nutters", then "assholes".

Totally detrimental. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21478245 Mon, 24 Nov 2008 16:06:52 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21478180 said by sniff sniff :

Competition Bureau and the CRTC in bed with Bell?

»www.p2pnet.net/story/17677

something smells here, and it isn't my sox. :p
It's hard to ignore all the inbreeding going on, that's for sure. How it affects things is a definite big question-mark if there ever was one! :huh:
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc.

Authorized TSI employee ( »TekSavvy FAQ »Official support in the forum )
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21478180 Mon, 24 Nov 2008 15:54:46 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21478131 said by sniff sniff :

Competition Bureau and the CRTC in bed with Bell?

»www.p2pnet.net/story/17677

something smells here, and it isn't my sox. :p
And this surprises you? Just take a look at some of the past cases and the current commissioners. You'd have to be blind not to see it.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21478131 Mon, 24 Nov 2008 15:46:36 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21478083
»www.p2pnet.net/story/17677

something smells here, and it isn't my sox. :p]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21478083 Mon, 24 Nov 2008 15:39:48 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21478050 said by patcat88:

Why don't the ISPs just give users hardware encryption boxes to put after the DSL modem, and VPN all traffic as a single UDP (or TCP) stream back to their datacenter then decrypt it and de VPN it and continue it on its way? Think of the VPN as a value added service. Bell can't DPI encrypted traffic.
The hardware would not be cheap.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21478050 Mon, 24 Nov 2008 15:34:28 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21477886 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21477886 Mon, 24 Nov 2008 15:01:19 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21477883 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21477883 Mon, 24 Nov 2008 15:00:05 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21477053 I do not believe that the ruling made by the CRTC on the issues brought forth by the CAIP reflects the best interest of the consumer. The blanket throttling of wholesale customers was a blatant attempt by bell to remove any features from competitors that they did not desire to provide. It has been shown that the throttling is in place in many places where traffic congestion is not an issue and is not dependent on congestion in an area. If it could be shown that throttling was only engaged when\where congestion was occurring bells actions may be viewed as acceptable. At present the CRTC is eliminating the consumers choice of paying the additional cost associated with unlimited/unrestricted internet service and hindering the progress of the internet in Canada. While p2p might currently be a minority in terms of usage it should not be discriminated against as all technologies start out this way, if you cripple something before it can properly develop you destroy innovation. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21477053 Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:15:55 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21476994 said by fiestaware:

They will scan the thing and bin it, thinking "15-year-old".Or more insidiously, they will skim it, and begin to make subconscious prejudgments that the anti-throttling, pro-net-neutrality camp must be total nutters, and will be less likely to give our genuine arguments objective consideration in the future.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21476994 Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:05:59 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21476789 said by GNca George:

Good point, except that there aren't ANY competitors that can provide that kind of service at a reasonable price point. No Japanese transplants queueing up to run fibre to my doorstep miles out in the country... If only!True enough right now. Although I think the vast majority of people realize that living out in the country = rural lifestyle = totally different way of living. People up north want a truck with studded winter tires and a well with clean water. In downtown TO you want a TTC pass and a bottle of water from Pickering. You have to give up some things to gain other things when living rural, and those that don't understand that hate living out in the country (I should know! I was one of them!)

However, I've seen opportunities fly by so many times. Where I lived out in the country was a subdivision full of yuppies with $1/2 million houses. No DSL, no cable, and the fastest dialup you could get with 15 km long lines was 19.2 kbps. There's a great opportunity to be had there, and Bell, to this day, *still* hasn't bothered to put a DSLAM or remote out there.

Best of luck with your service!

said by GNca George:

You can go out and buy a GigE link all for yourself right now. Problem is, you aren't going to like the price.

Yup. Although, honestly, if I was a multi-millionaire, I'd have GigE, just for the hell of it. I believe that's what... $10k a month with Cogent? :D Wouldn't be too hard to swing if you won the $45 million 6/49.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21476789 Mon, 24 Nov 2008 11:25:41 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21476771 said by BonkersInc:

They oversubscribe lines, which I can understand because otherwise DSL would be expensive enough that noone would want it.

But, what level of oversubscribing is tolerable from the consumer's point of view?
Exactly. 5 or 10 or however many years ago, they made a business decision for subscription rates VS ACTUAL capacity. They gambled and lost (p2p changed the game), and now they are punishing us for THEIR mistakes. It's probably some dumb (or smart) CEO trying to save his ass/job.

If congestion is the problem, why FORCE congestion (congestion = slowdowns in speed = throttle). Just let it happen naturally... :/ I'm sure it would happen A LOT less than it does.

Heck, i've NEVER experienced congestion, AT ANY time of day. I can usually trace a slow speed to the source server. If I'm streaming / downloading from multiple sources I can usually add up all my speeds to get 5mbps, NO CONGESTION.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21476771 Mon, 24 Nov 2008 11:22:20 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21476508
But, what level of oversubscribing is tolerable from the consumer's point of view?

From »Re: Canadian Net Neutrality Movement. Feb. DEADLINE :

"With all the throttling and caps that are becoming reality, I'd like to point out that even with a 1 mbit link you can trash a 60 gig cap in a week. Is Bell's network really so poor that they are oversubscribing 5 (or even 10 or 16) times their network's capacity? What level of oversubscribing is considered acceptable?"]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21476508 Mon, 24 Nov 2008 10:29:14 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21476348 said by pnjunction:

And when we started actually using that 5 Mbps we got slapped with a throttle, which is his point: That Bell upgraded the last mile (first 5-7 Mbps ADSL, now ADSL2 remotes) so that they could advertise fast speeds but neglected invest in the rest of the network to carry our data.

How else can you explain that we can get 5-16 Mbps sync rates, but 'need' to be limited to 30 kB/s to relieve congestion?
Bravo... I believe this is the heart of the issue. Same as companies increasing download speeds while reducing monthly caps. Shameful.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21476348 Mon, 24 Nov 2008 09:54:14 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21474617 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21474617 Sun, 23 Nov 2008 20:51:26 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21472615 said by BonkersInc:

I see a lot of good issues raised in this thread and I feel compelled to add my 2 cents. :)

With all the throttling and caps that are becoming reality, I'd like to point out that even with a 1 mbit link you can trash a 60 gig cap in a week.

Is Bell's network really so poor that they are oversubscribing 5 (or even 10 or 16) times their network's capacity?

For someone like me, I am currently sitting at about 150 gigs transferred this month. Bell's website says 60 gigs + $2.5/gig, which raises my potential bill to $225 on top of my regular bill. And this is using on average only 20% of the potential speed I'm paying for.

And now, assuming Citi doesn't go under, we (the customers, whether Bell's customer or not), are going to be on the hook for billions of dollars of debt one way or another that will never go into any sort of improvements... I have a pretty good idea where my $225 overage fees will be going.

What are the chances that Bell will update their cap limits to allow for new bandwidth hungry applications that are sure to replace/compliment p2p in the future?

Can Teksavvy and other GAS customers demand that the money they pay out to Bell is accounted for so that we can actually see our $s being put back into the network that we are paying to maintain and upgrade?
If you want to laugh, I transferred over 1.4TB of data in my last month with Bell (on a grandfathered unlimited plan). If I was paying $1.25/GB for overages over 60GB, that would've been a $2000 bill after-tax. :)

I did it out of spite, really. Bell pissed me off. And I wanted to see what I could transfer with 6 meg service. :D]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21472615 Sun, 23 Nov 2008 13:06:43 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21472596
If the last federal election is any indication, it is to say how much people are ineducated on the issues and rely on their own bottom line in order to evaluate the state of affairs.

So that being said I rather agree with you that speaking our is a good thing, but if Canadians are being led to the slaughter it is because they don't know. Perhaps that is their own fault, but anyways...
--
Cheers!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21472596 Sun, 23 Nov 2008 13:02:29 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21472528 said by fiestaware:

[Reactions like that are pure detriment. If you care at all about net neutrality you will never write anything like that again.

Unfortunate outcomes are not best responded to with Crass lyrics. Geez.
I think some reactions are better than none at all. Canadians, as a a people, are like sheep being lead to the slaughter. We like to bitch and moan all the time but rarely stand up to be counted and make a difference (the last Federal Election is a perfect case study).

That being said, I agree that the tone was a bit over the top, but I'm sure it's better to have sent something than nothing at all.

That's the simple reason I have yet to send an e-mail to the CRTC or to my MP (or anyone for that matter) other than post in these forums: it's too early. I want to let it sit for a bit and then figure out what my "next move" will be.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21472528 Sun, 23 Nov 2008 12:45:39 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21471587 said by pnjunction:

said by DKS:

Very few outside of urban cores can get those speeds, remotes included.

You talking about 16 Mbps or 5? Many, if not most, DSL customers are getting 5 Mbps. Forget about 16 Mbps for now, wholesalers can only offer up to 5, and yet their customers still need to be throttled.

The average speedtest for TSI customers here is currently 3378/570, not far off the ideal of about 4300/680 for 5056/800 kbps sync. My parents live 9km out of a small city of 50k and they have a great line because there is a remote somewhere nearby.

I'm not saying that Bell shouldn't be investing in remotes and ADSL2, just that it's obvious that they have slacked on upgrading the backbones of the network (if their dubious claims of congestion are even true) since they can't even support 5 mbps service (which is rapidly becoming ancient by today's standards) without capping and throttling.
5 meg is the best anyone can expect outside of urban cores. Even with remotes it is dodgy. I'm inside a city but on the edge of 5056/800. It's slower down the street. Mind you, I've had major work done on my line for other reasons.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21471587 Sun, 23 Nov 2008 08:01:53 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21471476 unto themselves. Your email will not be read and make the bureaucrats think "Aw, look at this genuine human reaction!". They will scan the thing and bin it, thinking "15-year-old". At the CBC a disinterested intern may do even less than that.

You make another mistake: Not all reactions are valid. At least not to the CRTC - and, unfortunately, they're the people who's opinions count right now. Why tinge the fluent, well reasoned output of net neutrality's most thoughtful defenders with foot stomping and revolutionary clichés? Specialists in contract law and market economists will not be taking editorial cues from you either, I think - though that doesn't make their responses any less 'human'.

Not all opinions are equal; this is not Sesame Street. You can be 'pissed off' and not come off as if your car was just rear-ended on the way to an appointment/on a hot summer's day.

Now, if your email had taken the tone of your second post here, there'd be less to worry about. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21471476 Sun, 23 Nov 2008 06:12:37 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21470928
Human reaction is not "pure detriment"

There will be many many reactions to what the CRTC has done. Some will be well written, some not... some will offer examples, use graphs etc. some will be nothing but a mad, angry rant like mine was...

The fact is, they are all are valid, and all of them will, and should be heard.

If you think that thoughts and reactions like mine are out of line, then perhaps that is part of the underlying problem here...

We Canadians (as a rule) have been friendly, and nice and peaceful and patient and so on till we are red in the face...

It's time for change.

it's time that someone knows that we Canadians are just plain pissed off!

I don't think that's out of line at all...
I think it's just telling the truth.

cheers,
snuggs]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21470928 Sat, 22 Nov 2008 23:43:33 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21470508 said by snuggles :

just sent to the CRTC and CBC:
=====================================
quote: We're not endorsing internet throttling: CRTC
Bull!

take a God Damned stand for once... YOU WORK FOR US THE CANADIAN PEOPLE!!!
DO NOT MESS WITH US!

etc. etc. etc.

^ Reactions like that are pure detriment. If you care at all about net neutrality you will never write anything like that again.

Unfortunate outcomes are not best responded to with Crass lyrics. Geez. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21470508 Sat, 22 Nov 2008 21:39:00 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21468764
Also if they are deploying this many remotes that have gig-e im assuming area's with remotes and adsl2 service are on ethernet segments of bells network and since there wasnt even a mention of ethernet segments in bells submissions to the crtc (only atm)

I think Bell has likely keep critical data from the crtc that was required for the CRTC to make an informed decision. However the only people who would know this for sure are key people at bell.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21468764 Sat, 22 Nov 2008 13:47:26 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21468722 said by DKS:

Very few outside of urban cores can get those speeds, remotes included.
You talking about 16 Mbps or 5? Many, if not most, DSL customers are getting 5 Mbps. Forget about 16 Mbps for now, wholesalers can only offer up to 5, and yet their customers still need to be throttled.

The average speedtest for TSI customers here is currently 3378/570, not far off the ideal of about 4300/680 for 5056/800 kbps sync. My parents live 9km out of a small city of 50k and they have a great line because there is a remote somewhere nearby.

I'm not saying that Bell shouldn't be investing in remotes and ADSL2, just that it's obvious that they have slacked on upgrading the backbones of the network (if their dubious claims of congestion are even true) since they can't even support 5 mbps service (which is rapidly becoming ancient by today's standards) without capping and throttling.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21468722 Sat, 22 Nov 2008 13:33:08 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21468599 =====================================
quote: We're not endorsing internet throttling: CRTC
Bull!

take a God Damned stand for once... YOU WORK FOR US THE CANADIAN PEOPLE!!!
DO NOT MESS WITH US!

For Christs sake, we (the Canadian internet users, ie: we the people) are more informed, intelligent, aware and up to date on what is going on with the internet... WORLDWIDE!
OBVIOUSLY the CRTC is not!

Canada was... WAS!!! ONE OF THE world LEADERS IN DOMESTIC internet... That was over 5 years ago... NOW??? Canada has dropped below MANY third world countries in quality of internet speed / price and quality...
YOU, THE CRTC... YOU with NO back bone! are 99.9% to blame for this!
WHY??? because you sit back and DO NOTHING! YOU ALLOW BELL CANADA TO RUN MAKE YOUR DECISIONS FOR YOU!!!

Us Canadians will NOT stand by and watch you UNDERMINE the internet... Undermine OUR internet! Undermine DEMOCRACY!

Consider this the first in a series of LEGAL yet INCREASINGLY AGGRESSIVE messages you will receive on this subject...

REMEMBER MR CRTC... YOU WORK FOR US, CANADA!!!
WE PAY YOUR SALARY!!!

GET THAT BELL PHALLUS OUT OF YOUR CORPORATE BACKSIDE!

IF YOU KEEP IT UP, WE, CANADA WILL FIRE YOU!

signed,
one VERY upset and concerned Canadian!
signed
a citizen who really gives a sh*t about Canada, Freedom, and fighting against a Monopoly THAT (for many many years) WE THE PEOPLE PAID FOR!

Liberate the internet in Canada NOW!!!

===========================
k... I was a bit pissed and should have proof read it a bit more, but I'm not kidding...
I'm really pissed now, and will do all I can to stop the tyranny!

viva la revolution!!!
long live freedom and the internet!!!

xox,
snuggs]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21468599 Sat, 22 Nov 2008 12:54:59 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21468388
With all the throttling and caps that are becoming reality, I'd like to point out that even with a 1 mbit link you can trash a 60 gig cap in a week.

Is Bell's network really so poor that they are oversubscribing 5 (or even 10 or 16) times their network's capacity?

For someone like me, I am currently sitting at about 150 gigs transferred this month. Bell's website says 60 gigs + $2.5/gig, which raises my potential bill to $225 on top of my regular bill. And this is using on average only 20% of the potential speed I'm paying for.

And now, assuming Citi doesn't go under, we (the customers, whether Bell's customer or not), are going to be on the hook for billions of dollars of debt one way or another that will never go into any sort of improvements... I have a pretty good idea where my $225 overage fees will be going.

What are the chances that Bell will update their cap limits to allow for new bandwidth hungry applications that are sure to replace/compliment p2p in the future?

Can Teksavvy and other GAS customers demand that the money they pay out to Bell is accounted for so that we can actually see our $s being put back into the network that we are paying to maintain and upgrade?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21468388 Sat, 22 Nov 2008 11:55:45 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21467737 said by pnjunction:

said by DKS:

said by andyb:

upgrade from 1 meg was history long ago in 99% of places and has nothing to do with the 500 mill.The 500 mill is to put in remotes so that wholsalers like teksavvy cant get the customers.They paid out billions to shareholders over the last few years and sunk near 0 into backbone.

You need a refresher in history. Having been around here since 2000, I can trace my speeds from 1.5 meg to 5 meg over that time. It started in 200 and reached 5 meg in 2005. That's not "long ago".

And when we started actually using that 5 Mbps we got slapped with a throttle, which is his point: That Bell upgraded the last mile (first 5-7 Mbps ADSL, now ADSL2 remotes) so that they could advertise fast speeds but neglected invest in the rest of the network to carry our data.

How else can you explain that we can get 5-16 Mbps sync rates, but 'need' to be limited to 30 kB/s to relieve congestion?
Very few outside of urban cores can get those speeds, remotes included.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21467737 Sat, 22 Nov 2008 08:19:02 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21467734 said by Anon_Cow :

said by andyb:

5 years is a long time

Perhaps not in DKS years. As he keeps reminding us, he's a grumpy, yet wise, old man (I'm sure at least 3 of the 4 are correct) who was apparently the New World's designated greeter to the Leif Ericson landing party ;-)
And even Leif was a young pup! ;)
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21467734 Sat, 22 Nov 2008 08:17:46 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21467732 said by andyb:

5 years is a long time in technology and I don't need a refresher as this is near 2009 and I was with bell before DSL as you were and just recently left for a company that cares.I think you need to stop suckin up for bell.
I've been with Bell since December, 1994. In terms of a life it's a short time. A very short time.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21467732 Sat, 22 Nov 2008 08:16:35 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21467728 said by Abattoir:

Third, break up Bell. They are in obvious conflict positions, and are abusing their control over the network to benefit their other business units.
Bell WAS broken up. Entourage, TeleGlobe, Northern Telecom and Bell Aliant WERE all parts of Bell. Now they are individual parts.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21467728 Sat, 22 Nov 2008 08:14:59 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21467710 said by GNca George:

So that brings us back to how do you make Bell play nice, while allowing them to achieve a reasonable return on their investment in a world with dramatically different traffic patterns to those existing even a couple of years ago? Ouch.
First, whatever kind of network management is 'needed', it must be approved/regulated by the CRTC. No more 'what we say goes' from Bell, essentially dictating to the smaller ISPs what their business model and competitive advantages are permitted to be.

Second, burn every DPI-capable box at Bell. They have no valid place there. I certainly hope the Office of the Privacy Commissioner holds Bell at least somewhat accountable - they are still performing their own investigation, and they are probably one of the most consumer-friendly organization in the federal government.

Third, break up Bell. They are in obvious conflict positions, and are abusing their control over the network to benefit their other business units.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21467710 Sat, 22 Nov 2008 08:05:19 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21467655 said by shepd:

The excuses (whether valid or not) I see here suggesting that ISPs in general can't support P2P, and that customers don't mind, remind me of the excuses from American car makers that their customers don't want "fuel efficiency" or "stylish" or "reliable" cars, that really, customers just want "muscle" and "big". Except, of course, the opposite. This time, customers want "muscle" and "big" out of their internet.

If customers are saying they want to do P2P, and that's the majority of traffic you're all seeing, you're being told what you need to figure out: Either figure out how you can support P2P or, well, companies like Bell that don't care will join AMC. Someday.
Good point, except that there aren't ANY competitors that can provide that kind of service at a reasonable price point. No Japanese transplants queueing up to run fibre to my doorstep miles out in the country... If only!

You can go out and buy a GigE link all for yourself right now. Problem is, you aren't going to like the price.

Broadband price points were established years ago, before PtP became popular and traffic levels soared. There is absolutely no doubt that hauling bandwidth around is a lot cheaper every year, particularly if all you have to do is light up your fibre at a higher speed, but traffic is a heck of a lot higher too.

Its going to be interesting to see how this plays out.

George
--
Powered by Candlelight Wireless Broadband and Teksavvy MultiLink DSL!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21467655 Sat, 22 Nov 2008 07:24:40 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21467647 said by R0CKY:

This isn't the case with DSL... If you are taking a single point and distributing it directly to all clients, from this same point, then yes, what you say in here is a concern. This isn't our issue here. We don't get impacted the same way at all.
Sure, but you don't own the infrastructure end-to-end, so you don't have to deal with the issues of saturation in Upper Welly Boot, Ontario. Backhaul capacity is a problem for pretty much everyone once you get outside the metro cores. There is always a choke point somewhere. For example, there isn't enough backhaul bandwidth available at reasonable prices in a lot of Central Ontario. Sure, Toronto to Orillia is pretty good, but then you hit a relative desert until you get to North Bay.

And DSL is relevant where Bell has DSL infrastructure in place. There are LOTS of places still without DSL today because even Bell can't make the business case to install it. Which unfortunately means zero chance of making a case to install a parallel wired/fibre network in most of the country outside the downtown cores. Its very expensive erecting tens of thousands of kilometres of fibre up on the Shield.

In those areas you might have Bell/Rogers/Innukshuk pseudo-WiMax, probably do have Bell/Rogers/Telus 3G, or joy of joys, satellite as a last resort. If you're really lucky you might have a local wireless provider or two. But that brings you back to backhaul and the costs associated... The real cost of providing continuous-use 5 Mbit service in an outlying area is staggering, and $40 bucks a month or so comes no where near to covering it.

There has been a lot of chatter about building a wireless network to replace Bell. You could do that if you don't need a lot of bandwidth and pretty much ban PtP, but it won't work otherwise with any of the technologies available today or on the horizon.

So that brings us back to how do you make Bell play nice, while allowing them to achieve a reasonable return on their investment in a world with dramatically different traffic patterns to those existing even a couple of years ago? Ouch.

George
--
Powered by Candlelight Wireless Broadband and Teksavvy MultiLink DSL!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21467647 Sat, 22 Nov 2008 07:15:42 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21467326
It just occurred to me that the CRTC has completely sold out. I mean a lot of speculation has been going around and nothing really convinced me, until a thought just came up:

Bell Canada is a business and businesses' main goal and focus is profitability, not to say to make as much money as possible. We are not talking about a philanthropic organization here, especially not Bell.

Therefore every single move and decision made by a business is to affect the so called bottom line... and as much as possible. Even mores in public holding companies like Bell.

Now since it is a not a fact, or it is to say, debatable, that the throttle was ever about congestion (and since an agreement on this has never been ascertained any group of experts (other than by Bell nitwits and former Bell nitwits) the only possible other way that throttling the last mile on DSL connections makes any sense "on the bottom line" for Bell it *IS* as an way to maintain it's competitiveness.

Simply put, why in the world would anyone stay with Bell a Internet supplier if the were the only one throttled?

I mean, how else does Bell's profit margin stand to gain by throttling? More happy customers? Normally I'd be trying hard not to laugh, however, the pathetic way the CRTC operates leaves me with little humour.

So I am now thoroughly convinced that the CRTC is bunch of scumbags.

It is, sadly, a turning point in my view of our country as well. I always prided myself that we, me ans my country, were a fair people. We put people before money. Our regulators and semi-socialist nature was supposed to be about the checks ans balances between powerful money and important people.

This notion has seemed to dwindle into a mere long past dream.

To ROCKY I say, thank you man. If there is still a spark of hope in my soul it is because I see how you run your business with us, the folk, in mind. You may yet be the model for a new generation of businesses built on fair value instead of ... well the alternative...

JP
--
Cheers!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21467326 Sat, 22 Nov 2008 01:55:28 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21467220 DSLAM's with large numbers of customers using OC-3 to 2XGig-e uplinks, with up to (14X5X144) 10080 customers. Even with 2GE's, that's about 0.2Mbps per client. Most units aren't that subscribed, but it's still pretty dire.
And pretty much anything from aggregation to transport can be pretty tight these days.

The myth some people seem to have is that given the right sync, they have 5Mbps all time time from them to the handoff to the internet or the wholesale ISP. They don't. I would expect that globally, ratios of oversubscription at any one point (and the worst pinch point defines the whole experience) could be from 24:1 up to 64:1 or even 100:1.

This document »www.undertakingsbulletin.com/con···m_vp.pdf has some great illustration of how the GAS product physically connects, with GAS being like IPstream, except ATM and Ethernet are used by Bell interchangeably on the access network. Datastream, the product my earlier post alludes to is where the end ISP controls contention by choosing a dedicated amount of backhault from each CO to it's own PoP. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21467220 Sat, 22 Nov 2008 01:03:59 EDT Different TacK? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Different-TacK-21467217
Given that it is no more Bell's business what comprises the content of the data that Teksavvy customers interchange with Teksavvy over leased connections than it is the post office's business what people write in letters sent through the mail (and in fact an invasion of privacy to attempt to ascertain such), is it not possible to encrypt all traffic between the customer and Teksavvy? And could this not be done at the router or modem hardware level, so that Teksavvy would not to have to concern itself with multiple OS support and the like?

Teksavvy could even advertise that it is guarding the end-user's privacy from Bell's prying eyes, which would be a big selling feature given the rumoured capabilities of Satan's boxes.

Yes, there would be some up-front engineering costs involved and some communications overhead incurred (surely no more than 5%), but I cannot imagine that they would be inordinate and I'm sure the flood of new customers that such a service would bring would more than make up for it.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Different-TacK-21467217 Sat, 22 Nov 2008 01:03:11 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21467154
In the UK, ISP's who want to avoid BT's high oversubscription ratios haul their traffic from the CO onwards over their own infrastructure, and therefore have almost total control of the network experience.
In the GAS service, everything is shared accross all services from all providers until handoff either to Bell's border routers or the wholesale ISP. There is no dedicated 7gig's worth of capacity to any one point in the bell network or any 1 subcsriber after the AGAS links terminate on the Bell side. And the price paid today by wholesale users doesn't reflect the load ("usage") of the Bell facilities up until the handoff. There is a real difference in carrying a constant or sustained few Mbps of P2P traffic versus the bursty nature of surfing and http downloads of yesteryear on which the broadband over subscription model is based. I do not know what the best or fairest way to cost this usage is, but I hope it is reasonable for all parties.

Bell's need to throttle is based on lack of capacity at some point prior to a major IP pop where there is less exhaustion and more links to spread the load over, although Montreal-Toronto-NYC I hear will be the first major links to be rushed onto 40G to alleviate capacity issues.

My hope is that once usage based billing is in place, which it will be someday (I'm a realist), the throttle will be application neutral and based on real-time congestion information, either by law, the CRTC or Bell's own doing (you can dream).]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21467154 Sat, 22 Nov 2008 00:35:21 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21467144
If customers are saying they want to do P2P, and that's the majority of traffic you're all seeing, you're being told what you need to figure out: Either figure out how you can support P2P or, well, companies like Bell that don't care will join AMC. Someday.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21467144 Sat, 22 Nov 2008 00:33:06 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21466931 said by DKS:

You need a refresher in history. Having been around here since 2000, I can trace my speeds from 1.5 meg to 5 meg over that time. It started in 200 and reached 5 meg in 2005. That's not "long ago". And when we started actually using that 5 Mbps we got slapped with a throttle, which is his point: That Bell upgraded the last mile (first 5-7 Mbps ADSL, now ADSL2 remotes) so that they could advertise fast speeds but neglected invest in the rest of the network to carry our data.

How else can you explain that we can get 5-16 Mbps sync rates, but 'need' to be limited to 30 kB/s to relieve congestion?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21466931 Fri, 21 Nov 2008 23:31:29 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21466829 said by andyb:

5 years is a long time Perhaps not in DKS years. As he keeps reminding us, he's a grumpy, yet wise, old man (I'm sure at least 3 of the 4 are correct) who was apparently the New World's designated greeter to the Leif Ericson landing party ;-)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21466829 Fri, 21 Nov 2008 23:06:56 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21466601 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21466601 Fri, 21 Nov 2008 22:10:50 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21466408 said by GNca George:

Sure. I remember all kinds of stuff coming out of Bell and others that I mostly don't agree with.

I really don't know where the streaming argument is coming from, perhaps aside from Bell attempting to feather their own nests.

We aren't seeing the same trends at all. Not even slightly close. I do have sympathy with the PtP position, but Bell doesn't seem to be defending that much now. I shut down one customer this aftenoon for rabid PtP running wild, they were pulling a steady 8Mb download which slows everyone else down a bunch.

One of the big problems with providing really fast links is the issue with really fast PtP deriving from the link speed. All networks are shared, its just a question of where that sharing happens.

It can crater a big chunk of our network 'right now' as a result of one customer going nuts. We can't handle a really big continuous load. Sorry, the technology won't support dedicated bandwith to all customers at the same time, not now, not in the forseeable future. So much for the wireless/WiMax dream.

So you get cautious as a result as you don't want the flurry of support calls when one customer starts a big torrent, so you put processes in place to control the torrents...

Not a good scenario.

George
This isn't the case with DSL... If you are taking a single point and distributing it directly to all clients, from this same point, then yes, what you say in here is a concern. This isn't our issue here. We don't get impacted the same way at all.
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc.

Authorized TSI employee ( »TekSavvy FAQ »Official support in the forum )
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21466408 Fri, 21 Nov 2008 21:37:11 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21466362 said by andyb:

said by me13 :

Not true Bell has been upgrading, from 1 meg modems to ATM networks, to GiGe networks, with more remotes. This year Bell will spend over $500 million dollars on capital expense, not including $700 million for wilrless spectrum.

upgrade from 1 meg was history long ago in 99% of places and has nothing to do with the 500 mill.The 500 mill is to put in remotes so that wholsalers like teksavvy cant get the customers.They paid out billions to shareholders over the last few years and sunk near 0 into backbone.
You need a refresher in history. Having been around here since 2000, I can trace my speeds from 1.5 meg to 5 meg over that time. It started in 200 and reached 5 meg in 2005. That's not "long ago".
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21466362 Fri, 21 Nov 2008 21:26:03 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21466191 said by Scoop18:

Bell gets $20 a month for each Teksavvy customer.
Something like that, yes.

Now factor in everything else Bell needs to be paid for for one month, divide it by a month's total revenue, and multiply by 100. Then, for the sake of not giving out all the company's important numbers, round it off somehow.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21466191 Fri, 21 Nov 2008 20:57:37 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21466123
Once you get outside the major metro areas, the Internet becomes more like a giant primordial fern, frail and graceful in its majesty and reach, rather than a majestic oak founded on a tremendous trunk and spreading root system.

The branches up here get thinner and thinner, and less tolerant of rough treatment.

In downtown TO, there is a lot of redundancy and resiliance and a few people bucking the trend is neither here nor there.

Up here in the bush, a couple of people running wild can bring down the whole tree. You would have to see it to believe it.

Ever watch Axmen?

George
--
Powered by Candlelight Wireless Broadband and Teksavvy MultiLink DSL!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21466123 Fri, 21 Nov 2008 20:48:04 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21466035
I really don't know where the streaming argument is coming from, perhaps aside from Bell attempting to feather their own nests.

We aren't seeing the same trends at all. Not even slightly close. I do have sympathy with the PtP position, but Bell doesn't seem to be defending that much now. I shut down one customer this aftenoon for rabid PtP running wild, they were pulling a steady 8Mb download which slows everyone else down a bunch.

One of the big problems with providing really fast links is the issue with really fast PtP deriving from the link speed. All networks are shared, its just a question of where that sharing happens.

It can crater a big chunk of our network 'right now' as a result of one customer going nuts. We can't handle a really big continuous load. Sorry, the technology won't support dedicated bandwith to all customers at the same time, not now, not in the forseeable future. So much for the wireless/WiMax dream.

So you get cautious as a result as you don't want the flurry of support calls when one customer starts a big torrent, so you put processes in place to control the torrents...

Not a good scenario.

George
--
Powered by Candlelight Wireless Broadband and Teksavvy MultiLink DSL!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21466035 Fri, 21 Nov 2008 20:31:45 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21465966 said by GNca George:

Yes, PtP is the biggest culprit. By far. Streaming barely figures on our radar compared to PtP.

Next??

George
Remember this graph?

»/speak/slidesh···LQ%3D%3D

According to Bell's own stats, current and future growth streaming is almost on par with P2P and they project almost equal growth between now and 2012. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21465966 Fri, 21 Nov 2008 20:18:15 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21465872
I have a major customer in Huntsville who can't get service via Teksavvy. Guess what, they can get service from Bell, if you can call it service.

I guess if you're Bell, the remotes are a beautiful thing. If not direct from Bell, that's another story...

George
--
Powered by Candlelight Wireless Broadband and Teksavvy MultiLink DSL!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21465872 Fri, 21 Nov 2008 20:02:49 EDT Re: CRTC ruling coming Thursday Nov 20 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21465856
I get the undiluted pleasure of watching exactly what is happening on our network, minute by minute, hour by hour, month by month. For SIX years. And unlike the vast majority of the pundits here, I watched the changes happen. And then accelerate, very quickly in the first half of 2007 leading to where we are now.

Yes, PtP is the biggest culprit. By far. Streaming barely figures on our radar compared to PtP.

Next??

George
--
Powered by Candlelight Wireless Broadband and Teksavvy MultiLink DSL!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-ruling-coming-Thursday-Nov-20-21465856 Fri, 21 Nov 2008 19:59:46 EDT